Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:
There is no data that challenges my beliefs, Anonymous. 100 percent of the data supports Valuation-Informed Indexing, 0 percent of the data supports Buy-and-Hold.
I wish it weren’t so. If 10 percent of the data supported Buy-and-Hold, we could have fun arguing our different positions and you could learn from me and I could learn from you. But when 0 percent of the data supports your position, you are in a tough spot. That’s why we see death threats and demands for unjustified board bannings and tens of thousands of acts of defamation and threats to get academic researchers fired from their jobs. You ain’t got nothing else.
I didn’t do that to you, Anonymous. It was Jack Bogle who did that to you. He should have come clean when Shiller published his “revolutionary” (Shiller’s word) research. And, if Bogle was suffering too much from cognitive dissonance to do so, those who love him should have helped him out by asking him to address Shiller’s research and explain what changes he believed needed to be made to the Buy-and-Hold strategy to bring it up to date with the new research. You have a beef with everyone who failed to do that. You have no beef with me. I have done that.
Buy-and-Hold was a mistake. It was based on research that was published in 1965 and then discredited in 1981. When your strategy is discredited, you need to update it. Or else you need to stop claiming that the now-discredited strategy is supported by the peer-reviewed research. Once peer-reviewed research is published showing that there is precisely zero chance that a strategy could ever work for even a single long-term investor, claims that that strategy is supported by the peer-reviewed research become a lie.
That’s my sincere take re these terribly important matters, in any event.
I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person, my long-time Goon friend.